Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI
Natalia Caproni, Francesca Marchisio, Annarita Pecchi, Barbara Canossi, Rachele Battista, Piero D’Alimonte & Pietro Torricelli
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 1384–1395
Link to Journal
CE-US quantitative analysis offers an objective and reproducible assessment of lesion vascularisation, with good correlation with the results of MRI
Showing posts with label Breast. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Breast. Show all posts
Friday, 7 May 2010
Saturday, 10 April 2010
Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions
Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions
Pascal A. T. Baltzer, Matthias Benndorf, Matthias Dietzel, Mieczyslaw Gajda, Oumar Camara & Werner A. Kaiser
European Radiology 2010; 20;5:1101-1110
Link to Journal
Results:
This study examined 81 lesions (27 benign, 54 malignant). Sensitivity of ueMRM was 93% (observer 1) and 86% (observer 2), respectively. Sensitivity of ceMRM was 96.5% (observer 1) and 98.3% (observer 2). Specificity was 85.2% (ueMRM) and 92.6% (ceMRM) for both observers. The differences between both methods and observers were not significant (P ≥ 0.09). Lesion size measurements did not differ significantly among all sequences analyzed. Tumor visibility was worse using ueMRM for both benign (P < 0.001) and malignant lesions (P = 0.004)
Conclusion:
Sensitivity and specificity of ueMRM in mass lesions equal that of ceMRM. However, a reduced lesion visibility in ueMRM may lead to more false-negative findings
Pascal A. T. Baltzer, Matthias Benndorf, Matthias Dietzel, Mieczyslaw Gajda, Oumar Camara & Werner A. Kaiser
European Radiology 2010; 20;5:1101-1110
Link to Journal
Results:
This study examined 81 lesions (27 benign, 54 malignant). Sensitivity of ueMRM was 93% (observer 1) and 86% (observer 2), respectively. Sensitivity of ceMRM was 96.5% (observer 1) and 98.3% (observer 2). Specificity was 85.2% (ueMRM) and 92.6% (ceMRM) for both observers. The differences between both methods and observers were not significant (P ≥ 0.09). Lesion size measurements did not differ significantly among all sequences analyzed. Tumor visibility was worse using ueMRM for both benign (P < 0.001) and malignant lesions (P = 0.004)
Conclusion:
Sensitivity and specificity of ueMRM in mass lesions equal that of ceMRM. However, a reduced lesion visibility in ueMRM may lead to more false-negative findings
Influence of additional breast ultrasound on cancer detection in a cohort study for quality assurance in breast diagnosis—analysis of 102,577 diagnostic procedures
Influence of additional breast ultrasound on cancer detection in a cohort study for quality assurance in breast diagnosis—analysis of 102,577 diagnostic procedures
Fritz K. W. Schaefer, A. Waldmann, A. Katalinic, C. Wefelnberg, M. Heller, W. Jonat & I. Schreer
European Radiology 2010; 20;5:1085-1092
Link to Journal
Results:
In total, 62,006 additional USs were performed, in which 116 mammographically and clinically occult breast cancers were diagnosed (detection rate: 1.9/1,000 examinations), while mammography alone (40,551 examinations) revealed 903 cancers (22.3/1,000). Of all 1,019 breast cancer findings, 12.8% were detected because of the combination of mammography and US. In the group with ACR III/IV, 15.9% of cancers were found by supplemental US compared with mammography alone.
Conclusion:
The addition of US to mammography vs. mammography alone resulted in a significant (P < 0.01) increase in breast cancer detection rate
Fritz K. W. Schaefer, A. Waldmann, A. Katalinic, C. Wefelnberg, M. Heller, W. Jonat & I. Schreer
European Radiology 2010; 20;5:1085-1092
Link to Journal
Results:
In total, 62,006 additional USs were performed, in which 116 mammographically and clinically occult breast cancers were diagnosed (detection rate: 1.9/1,000 examinations), while mammography alone (40,551 examinations) revealed 903 cancers (22.3/1,000). Of all 1,019 breast cancer findings, 12.8% were detected because of the combination of mammography and US. In the group with ACR III/IV, 15.9% of cancers were found by supplemental US compared with mammography alone.
Conclusion:
The addition of US to mammography vs. mammography alone resulted in a significant (P < 0.01) increase in breast cancer detection rate
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice: initial results
Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice: initial results
Hendrik J. Teertstra, Claudette E. Loo, Maurice A. A. J. van den Bosch, Harm van Tinteren, Emiel J. T. Rutgers, Sara H. Muller & Kenneth G. A. Gilhuijs
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 16–24
Link to Journal
The purpose of this study was to assess the potential value of tomosynthesis in women with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms. Mammography and tomosynthesis investigations of 513 woman with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms were prospectively classified according to the ACR BI-RADS criteria. Sensitivity and specificity of both techniques for the detection of cancer were calculated.
In 112 newly detected cancers, tomosynthesis and mammography were each false- negative in 8 cases (7%). In the false- negative mammography cases, the tumor was detected with ultrasound (n = 4), MRI (n = 2), by recall after breast tomosynthesis interpretation (n = 1), and after prophylactic mastectomy (n = 1). Combining the results of mammography and tomosynthesis detected 109 cancers. Therefore in three patients, both mammography and tomosynthesis missed the carcinoma.
The sensitivity of both techniques for the detection of breast cancer was 92.9%, and the specificity of mammography and tomosynthesis was 86.1 and 84.4%, respectively.
Tomosynthesis can be used as an additional technique to mammography in patients referred with an abnormal screening mammo- gram or with clinical symptoms. Additional lesions detected by tomosynthesis, however, are also likely to be detected by other techniques used in the clinical work-up of these patients
Hendrik J. Teertstra, Claudette E. Loo, Maurice A. A. J. van den Bosch, Harm van Tinteren, Emiel J. T. Rutgers, Sara H. Muller & Kenneth G. A. Gilhuijs
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 16–24
Link to Journal
The purpose of this study was to assess the potential value of tomosynthesis in women with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms. Mammography and tomosynthesis investigations of 513 woman with an abnormal screening mammogram or with clinical symptoms were prospectively classified according to the ACR BI-RADS criteria. Sensitivity and specificity of both techniques for the detection of cancer were calculated.
In 112 newly detected cancers, tomosynthesis and mammography were each false- negative in 8 cases (7%). In the false- negative mammography cases, the tumor was detected with ultrasound (n = 4), MRI (n = 2), by recall after breast tomosynthesis interpretation (n = 1), and after prophylactic mastectomy (n = 1). Combining the results of mammography and tomosynthesis detected 109 cancers. Therefore in three patients, both mammography and tomosynthesis missed the carcinoma.
The sensitivity of both techniques for the detection of breast cancer was 92.9%, and the specificity of mammography and tomosynthesis was 86.1 and 84.4%, respectively.
Tomosynthesis can be used as an additional technique to mammography in patients referred with an abnormal screening mammo- gram or with clinical symptoms. Additional lesions detected by tomosynthesis, however, are also likely to be detected by other techniques used in the clinical work-up of these patients
The role of mean diffusivity (MD) as a predictive index of the response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: a preliminary study
The role of mean diffusivity (MD) as a predictive index of the response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: a preliminary study
Chiara Iacconi, Marco Giannelli, Carolina Marini, Anna Cilotti, Monica Moretti, Paolo Viacava, Eugenia Picano, Andrea Michelotti & Davide Caramella
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 303–308
Link to Journal
This preliminary study seems to indicate that low values of pre- chemotherapy MD may identify, before starting treatment, the patients with higher probability of response in terms of percentage of volume reduction of the lesion.
MD may represent a complementary parameter useful to select patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Chiara Iacconi, Marco Giannelli, Carolina Marini, Anna Cilotti, Monica Moretti, Paolo Viacava, Eugenia Picano, Andrea Michelotti & Davide Caramella
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 303–308
Link to Journal
This preliminary study seems to indicate that low values of pre- chemotherapy MD may identify, before starting treatment, the patients with higher probability of response in terms of percentage of volume reduction of the lesion.
MD may represent a complementary parameter useful to select patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Saturday, 13 March 2010
Analysis of false-negative results after US-guided 14-gauge core needle breast biopsy
Analysis of false-negative results after US-guided 14-gauge core needle breast biopsy
Ji Hyun Youk, Eun-Kyung Kim, Min Jung Kim, Jin Young Kwak & Eun Ju Son
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 782–789
Link to Journal
Most false negatives were found immediately and imaging-histological discordance was the most important clue. Careful correlation of clinical, radiological and histological results as well as appropriate follow-up is essential
Ji Hyun Youk, Eun-Kyung Kim, Min Jung Kim, Jin Young Kwak & Eun Ju Son
Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 782–789
Link to Journal
Most false negatives were found immediately and imaging-histological discordance was the most important clue. Careful correlation of clinical, radiological and histological results as well as appropriate follow-up is essential
Monday, 8 June 2009
Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin ech
Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo (HASTE) diffusion techniques
P. A. T. Baltzer, D. M. Renz, K.-H. Herrmann, M. Dietzel, I. Krumbein, M. Gajda, O. Camara, J. R. Reichenbach, W. A. Kaiser
Eur Radiol (2009) 19: 1612–1620
Link to Journal
The sensitivity and specificity of routine diagnostics (97.4% and 85.7%) were superior to EPI-DWI (87.2% and 82.9%) and HASTE-DWI (76.9% and 88.6%). Selecting only nonmass lesions, DWI did not prove to be of diagnostic value. Lesion demarcation by DWI was significantly lower compared with that by CE-T1w, with EPI-DWI showing the better performance (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found for size measurements between CE-T1w and DWI. Although clearly inferior compared with CE-T1w imaging, both DWI techniques are applicable for lesion assessment and size measurements
P. A. T. Baltzer, D. M. Renz, K.-H. Herrmann, M. Dietzel, I. Krumbein, M. Gajda, O. Camara, J. R. Reichenbach, W. A. Kaiser
Eur Radiol (2009) 19: 1612–1620
Link to Journal
The sensitivity and specificity of routine diagnostics (97.4% and 85.7%) were superior to EPI-DWI (87.2% and 82.9%) and HASTE-DWI (76.9% and 88.6%). Selecting only nonmass lesions, DWI did not prove to be of diagnostic value. Lesion demarcation by DWI was significantly lower compared with that by CE-T1w, with EPI-DWI showing the better performance (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found for size measurements between CE-T1w and DWI. Although clearly inferior compared with CE-T1w imaging, both DWI techniques are applicable for lesion assessment and size measurements
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)